Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/08 06:06:27


Post by: Dreadclaw69


I understand wanting to punish those who willfully took advantage of this situation. But stripping away the program that they rely upon to feed their family seems a little too strict. I think that these people should be dealt with by the criminal justice system, and made to work in the community


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/08 06:26:56


Post by: Ouze


Yeah, I think I agree. I think this is pretty clearly fraud, and should be punished, but cutting off food stamps seems like maybe not the best of all possible options, and I have to wonder about the ROI any worthwhile investigation is likely to produce. In some cases though, there is no direct "victim", as Walmart chose to just eat the charges after the state said they would not honor them. That probably should weigh into it as well.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 17:19:39


Post by: cincydooley


Good. Charge them as much as you can. Take away their foodstamps. They clearly have no sense of personal responsibility or accountability, so I hope the state holds them accountable.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 17:25:33


Post by: marv335


Withhold the stamps until the amount they spent is repaid.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 17:26:46


Post by: cincydooley


 marv335 wrote:
Withhold the stamps until the amount they spent is repaid.


I like that a lot.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 17:45:04


Post by: hotsauceman1


The problem with stripping them of it, while appropriate, hurts slot of children and innocents who will pay for someone eldest crime.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 17:57:25


Post by: lord_blackfang


How about investigating who's responsible for the system breaking down in the first place instead?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 18:05:36


Post by: Ahtman


It is better to punish the innocent and needy then to let a some get away with fraud.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 18:11:21


Post by: hotsauceman1


Who dias they are getting away with it. Put th in grueling community service.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 18:19:43


Post by: Ahtman


The way everyone above was talking about it made it sound as if they were just going to take away foodstamps from everyone. If only the people who abused it get hit then I'm fine with that, and community service isn't a bad idea either.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 18:28:20


Post by: hotsauceman1


I say let them keep their stamps, but make them pay their due with service if they have kids to feed. We cant punish the kids for the parents crime
Fox News Article wrote:A worker at a soup kitchen in Alexandria said cutting off food stamps from a family would be detrimental. She said most recipients she sees receive a $25-a-month stipend. She was inside a store when the malfunction occurred, and recalled feeling empathy when she saw the individuals, who otherwise could not afford it, stacking up on food.

This is important, Not all who commit crimes are bad people deserving of horrible punishment. These people took advantage of a situation to feed them and their families when they might not normally be able to.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 18:40:39


Post by: Grey Templar


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
This is important, Not all who commit crimes are criminals.


That is completely incorrect. Anyone who commits a crime is, by very definition, a criminal.

The motive for a crime does not change the fact it was a crime.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 18:50:13


Post by: hotsauceman1


These people just did what they can to feed their family. I mean a 25$ a month stipend?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 19:05:06


Post by: Grey Templar


Still doesn't make it any less of a crime.

Anybody might do the same in the same circumstances, but it would still be wrong.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 19:51:19


Post by: djones520


Something certainly needs to be done about it. Is this the best way? Don't know.

I'd probably go for criminal prosecution myself.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:00:28


Post by: Ahtman


 Grey Templar wrote:
Still doesn't make it any less of a crime.


Going 1 mile over the speed limit makes you criminal, but that doesn't mean you should be treated the same as a murderer.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:04:24


Post by: Grey Templar


Correct. Its a crime that isn't very severe.

I'm not saying the punishment should be disproportionate. Suspension of food stamps and/or charges of theft will be sufficient.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:06:57


Post by: hotsauceman1


And the removal of foodstamps will hurt others


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:07:37


Post by: Grey Templar


Than maybe they should have considered that when they abused the system.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:15:36


Post by: hotsauceman1


You can always say "Well they should have done this or that" but the point is that the removal of foodstamps from certain homes will hurt a bit of people, especially young children who might go hungry.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:33:06


Post by: Overread


People reliant on food stamps are already in a situation where they generally need support in order to feed themselves, which is one of the most basic things in life. When the malfunction occurred you had people who normally could not afford much food suddenly able to get way more than they should. That is a huge amount of temptation for people already under the stress and pressure of low income.


Whilst the moral/honourable thing would have been not to claim the extra its understandable when people in that situation did.


Punishment should be appropriate, but stripping them of the food stamps sounds like a step in the wrong direction since you're taking someone already in a bad situation and making it considerably worse.

Instead they should be made to work off what they took - community service would be a fine way to get those people to give back what they took and punish them in the short term whilst not punishing them and their dependants in the long term. Heck maybe it could be the starting point of a community work for food program where by councils get community services performed in exchange for extra food stamps. (a positive spin out of a negative situation).


I agree that for taking advantage a punishment is needed; we have to remember that the food wasn't free and someone has to pay for it at some point (in this case Walmart paid for it).


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:45:41


Post by: Ouze


 Grey Templar wrote:
Than maybe they should have considered that when they abused the system.


Good response, Inspector Javert.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:55:03


Post by: Grey Templar


This isn't exactly 19th century France.

We are talking about people abusing a system designed to help them. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 20:57:32


Post by: Kilkrazy


Bring back debtors' prison as in Georgian times.

Deport defaulters to America and Australia.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 21:04:40


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 Kilkrazy wrote:
Bring back debtors' prison as in Georgian times.

Deport defaulters to America and Australia.

So what do we do with those already in America?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 21:05:06


Post by: LordofHats


 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Bring back debtors' prison as in Georgian times.

Deport defaulters to America and Australia.

So what do we do with those already in America?


Deport them to Louisiana.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 21:09:34


Post by: Kilkrazy


 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Bring back debtors' prison as in Georgian times.

Deport defaulters to America and Australia.

So what do we do with those already in America?


Perhaps they have already suffered the worst punishment that can be meted out.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 21:45:42


Post by: Platuan4th


 LordofHats wrote:
 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Bring back debtors' prison as in Georgian times.

Deport defaulters to America and Australia.

So what do we do with those already in America?


Deport them to Louisiana.


Now you're just talking cruel and unusual.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 22:00:08


Post by: LordofHats


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Send them to texas


No Texas has guns. They could arm themselves.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 22:39:42


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 LordofHats wrote:
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Send them to texas


No Texas has guns. They could arm themselves.

What about;
- California
- New York
- Chicago
instead?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 22:41:55


Post by: LordofHats


We could just dig a ditch and drop them in. They'll starve anyway without food.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 22:55:35


Post by: Ouze


You know, I've been thinking it over, and now I think maybe we should just let this one go.

Due to a software bug, some hungry people in the richest country in the world got some food to which they were not entitled from the richest company in said richest country. I reject the idea that we have to choose between "lets make them hungrier" or "lets screw up their lives forever by giving them criminal convictions". The software bug was addressed and the issue is fixed. I think we should show some prosecutorial discretion and just, you know, move on.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 22:58:55


Post by: LordofHats


 Ouze wrote:
You know, I've been thinking it over, and now I think maybe we should just let this one go.

Due to a software bug, some hungry people in the richest country in the world got some food to which they were not entitled from the richest company in said richest country. I reject the idea that we have to choose between "lets make them hungrier" or "lets screw up their lives forever by giving them criminal convictions". The software bug was addressed and the issue is fixed. I think we should show some prosecutorial discretion and just, you know, move on.



I'm inclined to agree (assuming all they got was simple food mind you). Someone getting a boat load of groceries while they could, let them pass and tighten up the system so this doesn't happen again. Someone who bought a whole bunch of money on wine, beer, fancy chocolates, I have no idea what these cards allow people to buy, book um. There's people seizing opportunity when they can, and then there's just outright abusing a system. This should be handled case by case with only extremely overt abuse actually being punished.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 23:13:35


Post by: djones520


 Ahtman wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Still doesn't make it any less of a crime.


Going 1 mile over the speed limit makes you criminal, but that doesn't mean you should be treated the same as a murderer.


Who advocated throwing them in prison for life?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 23:47:22


Post by: MeanGreenStompa


They should repay those who's money they misspent.

So, community service of some kind or a full cash repayment worked out over a period of time. They can clear parkland, paint state owned schools, clean monuments or something for a set number of hours per dollars.

This does not warrant a criminal investigation or prosecution at further tax dollars.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 23:51:07


Post by: Ouze


Community service does seem fair.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 23:52:09


Post by: LordofHats


Yes. A good idea that one. Too bad we're talking about government here. They suck at those kinds of measures XD


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/09 23:58:10


Post by: agnosto


Considering that most of these people have children and you'd just be hurting the kids, yeah, brilliant idea. "Serves those little kids right, they should have chosen their parents more carefully."

I was a social worker at DHS here in Oklahoma for a couple of years and generally we would reduce benefits over time for those that were overpaid to account for an overage. Ideal? No, but other community services could, i.e. food pantries, can help in some regard. Flat out removing benefits entirely from a group of people that depend heavily upon the dole....not good.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:00:28


Post by: djones520


 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
They should repay those who's money they misspent.

So, community service of some kind or a full cash repayment worked out over a period of time. They can clear parkland, paint state owned schools, clean monuments or something for a set number of hours per dollars.

This does not warrant a criminal investigation or prosecution at further tax dollars.



As far as I am aware, you cannot mandate such things without court order. Meaning prosecution would be necessary.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:03:04


Post by: SilenzZzz


quite a few of the people that did it knew exactly what they were doing ... i was at a store when some of it started happening ... saw one person inline call their friend and tell them 'get here now, they are letting you get anything with your card' ... and outside some people were bragging about how they had just spent their money last week on the card and they were glad their friend called them so they could come and get more. (said while loading the groceries into the back of a lincoln navigator)

now there are some people that do honestly need help from the system .. but one of the big things is. it is meant to supplement your groceries. not outright buy them so that you have more money to spend on things like getting your hair fixed or nails done ...

the major example in my area (the same area this happened) is that most of the people abusing the system know they are doing it. but have figured out that they have more money to spend if they just work a few hours a week ... and get their bills and housing for almost free, groceries paid for and so on. and then they will do other work on the side for cash.

but a family that has 2 kids .. and both parents work full time. make enough money to just cover rent and utilities and about 200$ a month left over for groceries get told that they make to much money for assistance like that.

and on the situation the thread is about .. several employee's from a location were fired as well for calling and letting their family and friends know what was going on so they could get up there ...


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:08:26


Post by: Ma55ter_fett


 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
They should repay those who's money they misspent.

So, community service of some kind or a full cash repayment worked out over a period of time. They can clear parkland, paint state owned schools, clean monuments or something for a set number of hours per dollars.

This does not warrant a criminal investigation or prosecution at further tax dollars.



Well since walmart ate the cost no taxpayers dollars went to waste. I guess walmart is owed something but I'm not really going to shed a tear for them.

I guess I support letting this one go.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:09:40


Post by: djones520


 Ma55ter_fett wrote:
 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
They should repay those who's money they misspent.

So, community service of some kind or a full cash repayment worked out over a period of time. They can clear parkland, paint state owned schools, clean monuments or something for a set number of hours per dollars.

This does not warrant a criminal investigation or prosecution at further tax dollars.



Well since walmart ate the cost no taxpayers dollars went to waste. I guess walmart is owed something but I'm not really going to shed a tear for them.

I guess I support letting this one go.


Ehh, they just committed fraud. Let it go, I'm sure they won't do it again.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:11:21


Post by: Ma55ter_fett


 djones520 wrote:
 Ma55ter_fett wrote:
 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
They should repay those who's money they misspent.

So, community service of some kind or a full cash repayment worked out over a period of time. They can clear parkland, paint state owned schools, clean monuments or something for a set number of hours per dollars.

This does not warrant a criminal investigation or prosecution at further tax dollars.



Well since walmart ate the cost no taxpayers dollars went to waste. I guess walmart is owed something but I'm not really going to shed a tear for them.

I guess I support letting this one go.


Ehh, they just committed fraud. Let it go, I'm sure they won't do it again.


That's the spirit feel the love for the little man.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:14:29


Post by: LordofHats


Ehh, they just committed fraud. Let it go, I'm sure they won't do it again.


It's not like they gamed the system or cheated it. The system actually broke down with a software glitch. Assuming that the system gets fixed so it doesn't break again, the chances of a repeat are low.

Besides, how do you punish the poor without causing more harm than good? Orphaned kids that go into the crappy foster care system, families that already struggle to pay for their needs having even less means, etc etc.

People are prosecuted to deter and give peace to victims. This is effectively a victimless crime, so no one is really getting peace from it. Fix the system and it won't happen again so nothing is being deterred. The law isn't served here.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:17:26


Post by: djones520


So, even though they knowingly did wrong, you guys are cool with just letting it go, because their "poor".

What the hell do you think that breeds?

Never mind the complete and total lack of values that this represents, things like integrity.

The lack of it exhibited in the situation, and in this thread, is disgusting.

What do you think it's teaching the children you guys are so worried about?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:22:06


Post by: KalashnikovMarine


Gotta agree with Jones. There needs to be some accounting just in the name of social order.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:22:17


Post by: LordofHats


 djones520 wrote:
So, even though they knowingly did wrong, you guys are cool with just letting it go, because their "poor".


Not really. But there isn't much that can be done.

What the hell do you think that breeds?


What does punishing them breed? An outcome that's not that much different really.

Never mind the complete and total lack of values that this represents, things like integrity.

The lack of it exhibited in the situation, and in this thread, is disgusting.


I hear it's lonely at the top of the pedestal

You don't need to be insulting to the other posters in the thread man. Going after these people, I just don't see any good coming out of it. They broke the law and normally I'm all for dropping the hammer, but these are people who pretty much have nothing that can realistically be taken from them. Take away the food cards and they can't feed themselves. Send them to jail and their kids get thrown into our terrible social services system.

No one was hurt by this. The state and some businesses got cheated out of money that will be a drop in the hat in the big scheme of things. Assuming the system is fixed it won't happen again. Society is likely best served just letting it go.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:28:09


Post by: Ma55ter_fett


 djones520 wrote:
So, even though they knowingly did wrong, you guys are cool with just letting it go, because their "poor".

What the hell do you think that breeds?

Never mind the complete and total lack of values that this represents, things like integrity.

The lack of it exhibited in the situation, and in this thread, is disgusting.

What do you think it's teaching the children you guys are so worried about?



When you drive on the highway you go 5 miles over the speed limit. When you see a cop sitting on the side of the road you slow down, and then speed up again when you can't see him in your rear view mirror anymore.

In short you only obey the rules when an authority figure is watching.

Thats a lack of integrity right there.




face added for proper lack of gravitas


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 00:56:25


Post by: hotsauceman1


 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Gotta agree with Jones. There needs to be some accounting just in the name of social order.

There is, just dont take the way many of them rely to put food on the table. But i have a feeling that no matter what happens people are going to get screwed.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 02:39:52


Post by: KalashnikovMarine


Take their children for the state's new reeducation facilities! These thieves shall work off their debt in the mines!

Everyone wins!


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 02:48:28


Post by: MeanGreenStompa


 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Take their children for the state's new reeducation facilities! These thieves shall work off their debt in the mines!

Everyone wins!


Easy there Joe Stalin...


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 02:55:11


Post by: LordofHats


 MeanGreenStompa wrote:


Easy there Joe Stalin...




Hey man, Stalin loves children.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 02:57:57


Post by: hotsauceman1


He loves them....FOR DINNER!!!!!!


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:04:24


Post by: Relapse


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I say let them keep their stamps, but make them pay their due with service if they have kids to feed. We cant punish the kids for the parents crime
Fox News Article wrote:A worker at a soup kitchen in Alexandria said cutting off food stamps from a family would be detrimental. She said most recipients she sees receive a $25-a-month stipend. She was inside a store when the malfunction occurred, and recalled feeling empathy when she saw the individuals, who otherwise could not afford it, stacking up on food.

This is important, Not all who commit crimes are bad people deserving of horrible punishment. These people took advantage of a situation to feed them and their families when they might not normally be able to.


I wonder what circumstance puts them at $25 amonth because I suspect it's more sob story than truth. I checked on that and came up with this chart listed for aid listed.


http://www.dss.state.la.us/index.cfm?md=pagebuilder&tmp=home&nid=34&pnid=7&pid=93&catid=0

I have a family of 6 and can easily feed them with the stipend listed.


The people in the stores in no way, shape, or form have the need of 8 shopping carts worth of food. They are the same type as the people in New Orleans I used to see on their way to the scrap recyclers with the copper pipes they stripped from the bottom of somebodies house.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:05:16


Post by: d-usa


I am 100% sure that any of the posters here would do anything they could possibly do to feed their children. I know that if I had to choose between breaking the law, or my family going hungry, I would break the law.

Now I'm not talking about "not eating what we would like" or "not the lifestyle I would like", but honest to God hunger. I would do whatever it takes, and I truly think that any of you would do the same.

Hunger is horrible, and there are still way to many people who have children that go to bed without food. My wife's school has enough volunteers and donations for them to send home backpacks with some children each Friday to make sure that these kids have food to eat over the weekend, and for those kids the breakfast and lunch they get at school will be their only meals that day.

We went today for a "Thanksgiving" meal that was organized by one of the Churches that is near the school. Nice community event, they had some activities for the kids there as well and of course the staff was there. When we went to get our food we got a giant styrofoam box of food for each of us. A couple pounds of turkey each, giant helping of mashed potatoes, giant helping of green beans.

It was an obscene amount of food for one person to eat there. And that was my initial thought as a person that doesn't have to worry about hunger: "Nobody needs that much food to eat for a meal". But then I remembered what area I was in, and the population served by this school. And then I changed and instead of looking at this giant plate of "nobody will be able to eat this much food for a meal" I was able to look at it for what it really was: for many families in that school that day this plate of food was their lunch for today, their dinner for today, and their three meals for tomorrow. This event put on by the church made sure that for this weekend the families didn't have to worry about what their children will eat until they get their breakfast on Monday morning when they return to school. That's why everybody got a giant mountain of food in a to-go container instead of a sendible portion on a paper plate, the church knew what they were doing.

But looking at it through the eyes of somebody that doesn't go hungry, it just seemed like a waste of food for a single meal. But for many of these people there, it meant a weekend of not worrying about how to feed their children.

tl;dr

Hunger sucks. It is horrible. People will do whatever they can to make sure their families have food. I think if any of you pretend that you wouldn't do the same then you are full of it.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:06:06


Post by: Tydil


 LordofHats wrote:

No one was hurt by this. The state and some businesses got cheated out of money...


No one was hurt.


The state and some businesses got cheated out of money...


Seems like you're contradicting yourself there. I get the "down with big business thing" a lot of people have in their heads, but there is such a hypocrisy when it comes to punishments. I bet you were furious when big businesses had to pay millions of dollars for fraud and it was just a drop in the bucket.

Listen, there is nothing they can repay us without causing negative externalities. I think we can all calmly agree with this. But they committed a crime and need to be punished. We shouldn't spare the rod just because they're poor, just because of anything.

All this talk in their defense is starting to sound like the mother of a boy in chains before the court: "He's a good boy, your honor. He never would have pulled the trigger even though it was loaded. He feels really bad and won't do it again. He's a good boy." She knows what to say because the same words worked last time.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:06:13


Post by: LordofHats


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
He loves them....FOR DINNER!!!!!!


Maybe he should have had a, food card, for them?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:31:24


Post by: d-usa


Tydil wrote:

Listen, there is nothing they can repay us without causing negative externalities. I think we can all calmly agree with this. But they committed a crime and need to be punished. We shouldn't spare the rod just because they're poor, just because of anything.


The only problem is that you need to find a way to punish the person that did the deed that also doesn't punish the people that had nothing to do with it.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:38:24


Post by: Relapse


 d-usa wrote:
Tydil wrote:

Listen, there is nothing they can repay us without causing negative externalities. I think we can all calmly agree with this. But they committed a crime and need to be punished. We shouldn't spare the rod just because they're poor, just because of anything.


The only problem is that you need to find a way to punish the person that did the deed that also doesn't punish the people that had nothing to do with it.



That's the tricky part, but Louisiana has enough garbage on the roads that need cleaning or other such labor done, that the thieves could easily work off their debt. Community service is the way to go in my opinion.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 03:58:08


Post by: d-usa


Relapse wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Tydil wrote:

Listen, there is nothing they can repay us without causing negative externalities. I think we can all calmly agree with this. But they committed a crime and need to be punished. We shouldn't spare the rod just because they're poor, just because of anything.


The only problem is that you need to find a way to punish the person that did the deed that also doesn't punish the people that had nothing to do with it.



That's the tricky part, but Louisiana has enough garbage on the roads that need cleaning or other such labor done, that the thieves could easily work off their debt. Community service is the way to go in my opinion.


Very true.

I would even consider tying the money they spend to income tax returns, and witholding that until the money is paid back. Although I would admit that this could also still end up hurting children to some extend, but less so than simply not giving the families money for food anymore.

I'm also just a bit curious how much money Wal-Mart will end up loosing between the mark-up on food items, the actual cost for those products that Wal-Mart had to spend, and the money they will write off their taxes due to this. Not that this would make it any more right, just curious.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 04:01:24


Post by: Platuan4th


 d-usa wrote:

I would even consider tying the money they spend to income tax returns,


Heh.

Heh.

That's funny.

LA tax rate tends to mean people don't get returns from State Taxes, we pay them. In 16 years, I've received returns from them about 3 times, all of them while under 18.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 08:32:23


Post by: Seaward


Lotta guys in this thread who spend crazy money on little plastic space mens. If yanking the food stamps is really that much of an outrage and something you can't abide, I'd be willing to be Louisiana would let you foot the bill for the offenders. You've got the means. Do your part. Make life better for others, not yourself.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 08:46:47


Post by: Kilkrazy


That already happens through (A) the tax system and (B) Walmart's profits from people shopping there.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 08:54:32


Post by: Seaward


 Kilkrazy wrote:
That already happens through (A) the tax system and (B) Walmart's profits from people shopping there.

Ah, so it should be other people footing the bill.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 10:26:06


Post by: Kilkrazy


Everyone foots the bill who pays taxes or shops at Walmart.

You will find that recovering money from people who have none is a pointless endeavour.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 10:32:21


Post by: Seaward


 Kilkrazy wrote:
Everyone foots the bill who pays taxes or shops at Walmart.

You will find that recovering money from people who have none is a pointless endeavour.

I don't see anything at all about this potentiality that is an attempt to recover money. It's an attempt to punish people who committed a crime.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 11:21:26


Post by: Da Boss


So you guys are okay with kids going hungry to meet the requirement for justice?

I reckon it goes to show that most of you have never been hungry, properly hungry, in your lives.

I'm sure the people who took the food weren't saints, most likely a fair few of them were useless and unpleasant people. But their kids are blameless in this. Find a way to punish them that doesn't also punish their kids.

I'd even go as far as to say it's not "normal" fraud because the system broke and was allowing it- they didn't intentionally break or even try to break the system. I wouldn't particularly mind if they got some litter picking duty or something as punishment to satisfy the apparent need for JUSTICE but I am not okay with anything that hurts their dependants to "teach them a lesson".

Though I know it's likely that several of you disagree with the entire idea of food cards, so this is probably a great chance to get rid of them for you.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 11:39:46


Post by: Seaward


 Da Boss wrote:
So you guys are okay with kids going hungry

You are, too.

I guarantee you that you do not give every last cent (or whatever the smallest denomination of your given currency is) other than what you need to survive to starving children.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 11:49:34


Post by: dogma


 Seaward wrote:

I guarantee you that you do not give every last cent (or whatever the smallest denomination of your given currency is) other than what you need to survive to starving children.


That's a great case for taxation.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 11:58:58


Post by: Seaward


 dogma wrote:
That's a great case for taxation.

Think so?

I thought it was just an example of bleeding heart hypocrisy.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:00:53


Post by: d-usa


I think people who care about the security of our country should just donate every single penny to the military. I don't care about war and stuff, why should my tax money go towards a war I don't even support.

Let the people who want us to fighit pay for it...


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:10:39


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
I think people who care about the security of our country should just donate every single penny to the military. I don't care about war and stuff, why should my tax money go towards a war I don't even support.

Let the people who want us to fighit pay for it...


Sure. Set up a mechanism for the military to accept donations, and your plan would be fine.

Wait. Were you trying to suggest that I've been calling for more tax revenue to be generated in order to increase military funding or something? Or maybe just that I want to be able to say I support the general notion of a military but don't want to make any personal sacrifices for it? Because those would be the analogues. Neither would be true.

I can understand the discomfort it causes you to look at the amount of money you spend on stuff you don't need right after you try to lecture people on starving kids. But you need to come with much better game.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:12:26


Post by: Da Boss


Nice "gotcha" Seaward, but your stunning revelation that I don't give all my money to feed the poor is a complete non sequitor to the argument.

Here is a specific incidence where you are saying that you are in favour of kids going hungry because their parents did something questionable. Can you explain why you think that is a good idea rather than pointing out that I'm not Mother Theresa, as if that is somehow scoring a point?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
I think people who care about the security of our country should just donate every single penny to the military. I don't care about war and stuff, why should my tax money go towards a war I don't even support.

Let the people who want us to fighit pay for it...


Sure. Set up a mechanism for the military to accept donations, and your plan would be fine.

Wait. Were you trying to suggest that I've been calling for more tax revenue to be generated in order to increase military funding or something? Or maybe just that I want to be able to say I support the general notion of a military but don't want to make any personal sacrifices for it? Because those would be the analogues. Neither would be true.

I can understand the discomfort it causes you to look at the amount of money you spend on stuff you don't need right after you try to lecture people on starving kids. But you need to come with much better game.


I'm okay with my taxes being spent to help vulnerable children and I donate to children's charities (Unicef and Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children) as well as the Red Cross. Not that it matters, of course. This argument is about keeping the level of tax expenditure for feeding poor children at the same level it is right now.

I know you think your argument is a silver bullet for "bleeding heart liberals", and that's wonderful, but not very useful.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:16:47


Post by: Seaward


 Da Boss wrote:
Nice "gotcha" Seaward, but your stunning revelation that I don't give all my money to feed the poor is a complete non sequitor to the argument.

Not really. It simply demonstrates the notion that you care about starving children, but only up to a point, and that point could be plotted on a graph with axes labeled "How Much I Care" and "How Much It Costs Me".

Here is a specific incidence where you are saying that you are in favour of kids going hungry because their parents did something questionable. Can you explain why you think that is a good idea rather than pointing out that I'm not Mother Theresa, as if that is somehow scoring a point?

Sure. Kids are going to starve regardless. Do you think it's better that they starve in the name of justice, or better that they starve in the name of people having enough disposable income to buy plastic toy soldiers?

Both are going to happen. One at least serves a non-selfish purpose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Da Boss wrote:
I'm okay with my taxes being spent to help vulnerable children and I donate to children's charities (Unicef and Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children) as well as the Red Cross. Not that it matters, of course. This argument is about keeping the level of tax expenditure for feeding poor children at the same level it is right now.

Something tells me the level of tax expenditure wouldn't go down in this case, so your concerns should be satisfied.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:20:49


Post by: Da Boss


The point you are demonstrating is true, of course it is true! But it is still irrelevant to the argument.

I don't think I will ever understand you.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:25:08


Post by: dogma


 Seaward wrote:

I thought it was just an example of bleeding heart hypocrisy.


No, it was another example of you being hyperbolic, and a great case for taxation.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:26:03


Post by: d-usa


 Seaward wrote:

I can understand the discomfort it causes you to look at the amount of money you spend on stuff you don't need right after you try to lecture people on starving kids. But you need to come with much better game.


Things I have mentioned in this thread:

I think it is easy to forget what it is like to be hungry, and many of us will never know. I also admited that I am guilty of taking stuff for granted because I am in a much better position than many people.

I am against punishing kids for the crimes of their parents.

I am for a solution that would punish the parents, if it can be done without punishing the kids.

I said that I think anybody that had the choice between "breaking the law" and "letting my kids go hungry" would break the law, because having to worry about your kids going hungry is every parents nightmare.

Gave a reply to your usual "If people want to support something they should be willing to pay for it out of their own money or shut up. Quit making me pay for stuff you want" scenario.

You can read whatever you want into those statements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seaward, just a plain quesiton for you then:

Do you support taking nutritional support away from children because of something their parents did?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:29:24


Post by: Seaward


 dogma wrote:
No, it was another example of you being hyperbolic, and a great case for taxation.

Alright, I'll give you a chance to explain yourself.

Why are toy soldiers more important to you than starving children? If they aren't, why do you spend money on toy soldiers instead of giving it to starving children? Letting kids die of hunger when you could prevent it by doing without a box of Space Marines this month is pretty bad, dude. Is it simply a matter of saying that the guy who bought a yacht instead of toy soldiers is worse?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 d-usa wrote:
I think it is easy to forget what it is like to be hungry, and many of us will never know. I also admited that I am guilty of taking stuff for granted because I am in a much better position than many people.

I'm in a much better position than most, myself. Still managed to find out what it's like to be hungry.

I am against punishing kids for the crimes of their parents.

In this specific case, or in all cases? If I'm a single dad and I hold up a liquor store, should my sentence be absolved because it'll throw my kid into foster care?

I said that I think anybody that had the choice between "breaking the law" and "letting my kids go hungry" would break the law, because having to worry about your kids going hungry is every parents nightmare.

I think they would, too. Nobody's made the case that this was the choice in this scenario, though.

Gave a reply to your usual "If people want to support something they should be willing to pay for it out of their own money or shut up. Quit making me pay for stuff you want" scenario.

Oh, that wasn't the point. I'm well aware you'll never stop making me pay for stuff I don't particularly want.

Do you support taking nutritional support away from children because of something their parents did?

Nope. Doesn't mean it doesn't have to happen sometimes. Doesn't mean it's not at least a slightly more valid reason for letting kids starve than the desire to pick up a new codex.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:44:30


Post by: d-usa


Your "you picking up a codex is proof that you don't care about starving children" is a nice strawmen, and it would probably would make sense if any of us would advocate some sort of "no disposable income for anybody as long as people are hungry" agenda.

Personally, I am advocating the "everybody is forced to give a portion so that everybody has a portion and still has money for disposable income" agenda.

I'm heartbroken if you think my "donate some (not all) money and personal time to charity to support those less fortunate than me" somehow contradicts my "take some (not all) from people who have it to support those that have less" political views.

You'll also never stop making me pay for stuff I don't particularly want. So I guess we are even there.

And people have made the case that "breaking the law to make sure their families have food" has been a potential choice in this scenario. Sorry if you are missing those posts.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:51:33


Post by: dogma


 Seaward wrote:

Alright, I'll give you a chance to explain yourself.


How courteous of you.

 Seaward wrote:

Why are toy soldiers more important to you than starving children? If they aren't, why do you spend money on toy soldiers instead of giving it to starving children? Letting kids die of hunger when you could prevent it by doing without a box of Space Marines this month is pretty bad, dude. Is it simply a matter of saying that the guy who bought a yacht instead of toy soldiers is worse?

'
I invite you to occupy Wall Street.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:52:39


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
Your "you picking up a codex is proof that you don't care about starving children" is a nice strawmen, and it would probably would make sense if any of us would advocate some sort of "no disposable income for anybody as long as people are hungry" agenda.

Because, again, you care about starving children, but only up to a point.

Personally, I am advocating the "everybody is forced to give a portion so that everybody has a portion and still has money for disposable income" agenda.

And the cut-off point is right at your particular level, I'd imagine. If not, I'm not sure why you don't just overpay on your income tax return.

I'm heartbroken if you think my "donate some (not all) money and personal time to charity to support those less fortunate than me" somehow contradicts my "take some (not all) from people who have it to support those that have less" political views.

I think it contradicts your implied claim that children starving is intolerable.

You'll also never stop making me pay for stuff I don't particularly want. So I guess we are even there.

True. I'd just make you pay much, much less.

And people have made the case that "breaking the law to make sure their families have food" has been a potential choice in this scenario. Sorry if you are missing those posts.

Nah. They've tried to make it a, "Clearly, the only reason people broke the law in this case is because their children were starving!" point, but without any supporting evidence. Frankly, I'm a little surprised you'd let unsubstantiated claims like that go by. Since, you know, you're always so diligent.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 12:59:59


Post by: d-usa


So "don't tell me that you care about something and try to make me pay for anything unless you are willing to personally give every single penny away"?

Because so far all anybody is really getting from you in this thread is "if these kids starve to death because we took away their food stamps for something their parents did it is really the fault of people who post on this forum and spend money on stuff like DCM status..."


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:05:25


Post by: dogma


 Seaward wrote:

I think it contradicts your implied claim that children starving is intolerable.


The implied claim was that starvation in the US is intolerable, and it is.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:07:12


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
So "don't tell me that you care about something and try to make me pay for anything unless you are willing to personally give every single penny away"?

Because so far all anybody is really getting from you in this thread is "if these kids starve to death because we took away their food stamps for something their parents did it is really the fault of people who post on this forum and spend money on stuff like DCM status..."

Nah. It's the parents' fault.

Claiming that it's somehow unbearable, though, is rather hypocritical. It sucks, but unless we want to start letting parenthood become a get-out-of-jail-free card to prevent kids from becoming victims of the system, you might as well embrace the suck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 dogma wrote:
The implied claim was that starvation in the US is intolerable, and it is.

Sure it is. Try telling yourself that before hitting 'Complete Purchase' on your next Amazon order.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:14:25


Post by: d-usa


At least this thread has tought us that we will never see Seaward calling for increased spending on our military or veterans.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:19:25


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
At least this thread has tought us that we will never see Seaward calling for increased spending on our military or veterans.

Not at the expense of higher taxes, no.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:22:45


Post by: d-usa


 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
At least this thread has tought us that we will never see Seaward calling for increased spending on our military or veterans.

Not at the expense of higher taxes, no.


So increasing money for food stamps is okay as long as we don't increase taxes?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:32:26


Post by: dogma


 Seaward wrote:

Sure it is. Try telling yourself that before hitting 'Complete Purchase' on your next Amazon order.


Are you trying to represent yourself as a protectionist?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:38:17


Post by: d-usa


 dogma wrote:
 Seaward wrote:

Sure it is. Try telling yourself that before hitting 'Complete Purchase' on your next Amazon order.


Are you trying to represent yourself as a protectionist?


Don't worry. He's a DCM, so we know that he doesn't care that much about stuff he usually advocates for.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:39:58


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
So increasing money for food stamps is okay as long as we don't increase taxes?

Where would you get that idea?

You seem to be fundamentally missing the point. Perhaps deliberately, as is so often the case. You claim that children starving is intolerable. You, personally, could do much more about it than you do. Yet you do not. Clearly it's not as intolerable to you as you claim it is.




After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:50:47


Post by: d-usa


 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
So increasing money for food stamps is okay as long as we don't increase taxes?

Where would you get that idea?

You seem to be fundamentally missing the point. Perhaps deliberately, as is so often the case. You claim that children starving is intolerable. You, personally, could do much more about it than you do. Yet you do not. Clearly it's not as intolerable to you as you claim it is.




Well, you care as much about our military and veterans as I do about hungry people. Which according to you isn't all that much it appears.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 13:59:36


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
Well, you care as much about our military and veterans as I do about hungry people. Which according to you isn't all that much it appears.

Oh, no. By your own admission, it's intolerable that children starve.

I'd never say it's intolerable that we didn't increase military spending. You care far, far more about hungry people (or so you say, at least) than I've ever said I cared about the military.

Of course, I make sure to calibrate my statements to reflect my actual viewpoint, rather than some idealized version of my thoughts that I simply wished was true. Try it sometime. It's liberating.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:01:44


Post by: Da Boss


Seaward, your argument has as much nuance as that of a teenager.
You take an edge case and extrapolate far too much, you make each judgement an absolute, and you equivocate. Then you use cop out arguments like "kids are going to starve anyway" when in this situation there are solutions available which still punish the people who took the food and DON'T harm their kids.
In the situation of a murderer or an armed robber, there are few options other than incarceration. In that case, the cost (suffering of the child) is weighed against the benefit (getting a dangerous person off the street. Your argument is to make all such deliberations absolutist, and I believe you do so disingenuously because you disagree with foodstamps and all other "welfare" payments, and have one "good" argument against them with "bleeding hearts" (btw, this is the first time I've seen "I don't want innocent kids to starve" equated to "bleeding heart". Where I come from that's called empathy. )

I await your snappy one liner response eagerly.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:09:16


Post by: Seaward


 Da Boss wrote:
Seaward, your argument has as much nuance as that of a teenager.
You take an edge case and extrapolate far too much, you make each judgement an absolute, and you equivocate. Then you use cop out arguments like "kids are going to starve anyway" when in this situation there are solutions available which still punish the people who took the food and DON'T harm their kids.
In the situation of a murderer or an armed robber, there are few options other than incarceration. In that case, the cost (suffering of the child) is weighed against the benefit (getting a dangerous person off the street. Your argument is to make all such deliberations absolutist, and I believe you do so disingenuously because you disagree with foodstamps and all other "welfare" payments, and have one "good" argument against them with "bleeding hearts" (btw, this is the first time I've seen "I don't want innocent kids to starve" equated to "bleeding heart". Where I come from that's called empathy. )

I await your snappy one liner response eagerly.

There are lots of good arguments against food stamps. This is hardly the only one.

If my argument is absolutist, it's only in response to absolutist statements like, "It's intolerable that children starve!" Perhaps you ought to reconsider making such absolutist claims, which you clearly cannot back up, if you don't want absolutist arguments in return?

There's simply no argument to the fact that, if it were truly intolerable, you'd do a hell of a lot more about it. But that's not the case. It's tolerable. You tolerate it just fine. It might make you uncomfortable, even sad, but it's nothing that some luxury items won't cheer you up over.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:11:58


Post by: d-usa


 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Well, you care as much about our military and veterans as I do about hungry people. Which according to you isn't all that much it appears.

Oh, no. By your own admission, it's intolerable that children starve.

I'd never say it's intolerable that we didn't increase military spending. You care far, far more about hungry people (or so you say, at least) than I've ever said I cared about the military.

Of course, I make sure to calibrate my statements to reflect my actual viewpoint, rather than some idealized version of my thoughts that I simply wished was true. Try it sometime. It's liberating.


Except we know that by your own standards you don't find anything intolerable, at all. You call for increased military spending, but are okay with substandard care for injured soldiers and families suffering because of deployments and mental illness sustained by it. You might call for increased spending for veterans, but you don't find veteran suicide intolerable.

If we believe what you type, then we know that you are okay with all of that. We can tell because you spend $25 supporting a forum for plastic soldiers instead of donating that money. You set that standard, so at least own it.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:15:34


Post by: hotsauceman1


Lots of tu quoque here. Lets try making real arguments instead of saying "Well you do this"


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:17:14


Post by: nkelsch


 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Well, you care as much about our military and veterans as I do about hungry people. Which according to you isn't all that much it appears.

Oh, no. By your own admission, it's intolerable that children starve.

I'd never say it's intolerable that we didn't increase military spending. You care far, far more about hungry people (or so you say, at least) than I've ever said I cared about the military.

Of course, I make sure to calibrate my statements to reflect my actual viewpoint, rather than some idealized version of my thoughts that I simply wished was true. Try it sometime. It's liberating.


Kids get Free lunch through school programs. I would rather kids get fed through programs supervised by social workers opposed to abused food stamps. We already have programs which send dinner and weekend food home with the kids from school and provide food during the summer.

Food stamp programs do nothing to guarantee to feed starving children raised in low-income households.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:21:59


Post by: hotsauceman1


Yes they do. They make sure that the parents are able to feed their children, their babies, get gas, and other such things.
And I have had those free school lunches they suck and make you vomit.
Listen, Abusers are usually rare. there are not people who keep popping out kids for more money. Most people on foodstamps are decent people.
Also, anyone else think Walmart my possibly be to blame in this aswell, as enablers? They knew the system was down, but they kept ringing it up.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:23:36


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
Except we know that by your own standards you don't find anything intolerable, at all. You call for increased military spending, but are okay with substandard care for injured soldiers and families suffering because of deployments and mental illness sustained by it. You might call for increased spending for veterans, but you don't find veteran suicide intolerable.

If we believe what you type, then we know that you are okay with all of that. We can tell because you spend $25 supporting a forum for plastic soldiers instead of donating that money. You set that standard, so at least own it.

So on your scale, there's nothing between "okay" and "intolerable," eh? Interesting. That actually explains a lot about you.

I'm glad you're finally seeing the point, though. I don't like substandard care for veterans. I don't like veteran suicide. Is it something that I'm willing to pour every dollar I make above what I need to live into ending, though? No. I'd happily divert funding from Social Security or federal college loan programs or the TSA or any number of other things into veteran care, or even enlisted pay raises, and I'd even agree to paying more in tax than the ridiculous amount I already do if it were specifically earmarked for such things (which would never happen), but I don't find it to be something I cannot live with. I'm not naive or childish enough to expect a just world. It is not, by definition, intolerable.

Just like child hunger isn't for you. Unlike you, however, I'm honest enough to say what I actually mean, rather than what I wish I meant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Also, anyone else think Walmart my possibly be to blame in this aswell, as enablers? They knew the system was down, but they kept ringing it up.

I'd have been all for them not accepting food stamp-funded purchases on that given day. The problem they faced with doing that, though, is that the usual suspects would have cried rivers over food stamp recipients not being able to buy food for all of a day, undoubtedly while asserting that no one would have taken advantage of the system outage, thus, boo, Wal-mart's evil.

They were screwed either way.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:28:30


Post by: hotsauceman1


So, we went from talking about Foodstamps, to pointing fingers and saying "Well you do this, so it makes your point Mute"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Seaward wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Also, anyone else think Walmart my possibly be to blame in this aswell, as enablers? They knew the system was down, but they kept ringing it up.

I'd have been all for them not accepting food stamp-funded purchases on that given day. The problem they faced with doing that, though, is that the usual suspects would have cried rivers over food stamp recipients not being able to buy food for all of a day, undoubtedly while asserting that no one would have taken advantage of the system outage, thus, boo, Wal-mart's evil.

They were screwed either way.

Over here, safeway, our walmart, and several other stores did not accept foodstamps, citing they could get the money. Want to know how much outrage there was? 0.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:43:55


Post by: Platuan4th


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Yes they do. They make sure that the parents are able to feed their children, their babies, get gas, and other such things.


Hey, remember when stores in some states had to put up signs saying they were no longer accepting food stamps for alcohol and tobacco?

Seaward may be extreme(and a bit outrageous) in most of his points, but he's absolutely right about the programs not ensuring that people are feeding their children. There's little to no regulation in some areas as to what they're to be spent on. Luckily, most places have been working on that, but it's still far from perfect.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:45:57


Post by: Da Boss


I never said it was intolerable? I just said, in this instance, that it is the wrong choice to make. So please don't hide behind what someone else said while engaging with me.

Perhaps you need to work on improving your reading comprehension.

Edit: And it's absolutely right that food stamps don't count for alcohol and tobacco. If that's currently allowed in various states, that loophole should be closed. It's also true that welfare payments don't always help the kids in these families- teaching in a disadvantaged area, you see plenty of that. The solution to that problem is massively expensive though, so you've got to be willing to pay for a lot more government workers supervising the distribution of food, which is really impractical, or accept that in some cases it's not going to do the job you wanted it to, because the world isn't perfect.

A much worse scenario to me is delivering all welfare through charity. This means that unpopular groups or groups which stir fewer emotional responses would get less help.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:55:53


Post by: agnosto


I work in a school district, I worked for the Department of Human Services.

Free meals in school are great but if that is a child's only source of sustenance, you're setting that child up for failure. Here's a link to a good article in Educational Leadership:
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may13/vol70/num08/Hungry-Kids@-The-Solvable-Crisis.aspx

I've been on both sides of this issue. I grew up in generational poverty; I was eligible for free meals and didn't take advantage of them because of the stigma attached. Some schools offer weekend food bags for kids to take home with them as well.

In my time at DHS, I saw all manner of what many would consider insane behavior; attend a Ruby Payne training or two and the behavior starts to make sense. I'm trying to excuse the the behavior, but to change behavior you first need to understand its root cause(s). My point here is that children should never be penalized for the poor decision making of their parents; they can't choose their parents. They might actually learn something if this is approached in a methodic, non-kneejerk manner and everything is explained throughout the process instead of just levying some penalty and sending a letter (which is probably what will happen).

I like the public service option presented earlier.

@Da Boss:
Federal law prohibits the purchase of non-food items with food stamps (SNAP) benefits. What you often see; however, is that people will sell their benefits and then use the funds from the sell for alcohol and tobacco. If a store sells non-food items with food stamps, they can and often are brought up on federal fraud charges. There was a case here in Oklahoma where a rural convenience store was processing more sales in SNAP benefits than it had in merchandise, eventually red flags went up and the owner went to federal prison I believe.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:58:11


Post by: Seaward


 Da Boss wrote:
I never said it was intolerable? I just said, in this instance, that it is the wrong choice to make. So please don't hide behind what someone else said while engaging with me.

That's true, you did in fact never say it was intolerable. My apologies.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 14:58:18


Post by: d-usa


 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Except we know that by your own standards you don't find anything intolerable, at all. You call for increased military spending, but are okay with substandard care for injured soldiers and families suffering because of deployments and mental illness sustained by it. You might call for increased spending for veterans, but you don't find veteran suicide intolerable.

If we believe what you type, then we know that you are okay with all of that. We can tell because you spend $25 supporting a forum for plastic soldiers instead of donating that money. You set that standard, so at least own it.

So on your scale, there's nothing between "okay" and "intolerable," eh? Interesting. That actually explains a lot about you.

I'm glad you're finally seeing the point, though. I don't like substandard care for veterans. I don't like veteran suicide. Is it something that I'm willing to pour every dollar I make above what I need to live into ending, though? No. I'd happily divert funding from Social Security or federal college loan programs or the TSA or any number of other things into veteran care, or even enlisted pay raises, and I'd even agree to paying more in tax than the ridiculous amount I already do if it were specifically earmarked for such things (which would never happen), but I don't find it to be something I cannot live with. I'm not naive or childish enough to expect a just world.


But you don't support any of that enough for you not to be a DCM on DakkaDakka. So I'm glad you support paying more in taxes, but according to your own arguments in this thread there is no reason why our taxes should go up as long as you pay money to this very site.

It is not, by definition, intolerable.


And I never said childhood hunger is intolerable. I said that taking food form children because of something their parents did is intolerable.

Just like child hunger isn't for you. Unlike you, however, I'm honest enough to say what I actually mean, rather than what I wish I meant.


You have never been honest enough to argue what other people said, rather than what you wish we said.

Like your argument that I find childhood hunger intolerable, when I said that I find it intolerable to take food from children because of what their parents did.

Or like your argument that I support not punishing parents for anything if it would mean that it would somehow affect the children.

When you are honest enough to debate what people actually said, instead of changing their arguments and debating that, then you can pad your own shoulder.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 15:03:27


Post by: Seaward


 d-usa wrote:
But you don't support any of that enough for you not to be a DCM on DakkaDakka. So I'm glad you support paying more in taxes, but according to your own arguments in this thread there is no reason why our taxes should go up as long as you pay money to this very site.

No. There's no reason, period, that our taxes should go up. Not when we have so very many, many. many bad programs we could cut.

And I never said childhood hunger is intolerable.

So children starving is something you can live with? Good. Welcome to the real world. Curious that you defended that position for so long if you didn't actually believe it, but I suppose I should just learn to stop expecting sense and consistency from you.

You have never been honest enough to argue what other people said, rather than what you wish we said.

This is going to get real amusing in a second.

Like your argument that I find childhood hunger intolerable, when I said that I find it intolerable to take food from children because of what their parents did.

Or like your argument that I support not punishing parents for anything if it would mean that it would somehow affect the children.

Those two statements are completely contradictory, in this case.

When you are honest enough to debate what people actually said, instead of changing their arguments and debating that, then you can pad your own shoulder.

Do you ever consider following your own rules? I ask purely out of curiosity, because when it comes to dodging and distorting, I can only think of a few guys who give you a run for your money.

Actually, feth it. You've never provided anything useful. Ignore it is.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 15:13:37


Post by: d-usa


I applied your own argument to yourself. You change what people said and debate against that.

And those two statements are not contradictory at all. Not wanting to take food from children because of something their parents did does not mean that I am against any form of punishment that might affec the children in some form.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
And I got Seward to ignore me? Tired if me not falling for your attempts to twist arguments into something I didn't say and applying your own standards against you?

What purpose will I have now...


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 15:29:34


Post by: Da Boss


Cheers for the apology.

This is your essential point right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcLAJbvwNQU



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 15:32:59


Post by: Kilkrazy


 Seaward wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Everyone foots the bill who pays taxes or shops at Walmart.

You will find that recovering money from people who have none is a pointless endeavour.

I don't see anything at all about this potentiality that is an attempt to recover money. It's an attempt to punish people who committed a crime.


Why are you worried about who will foot the bill, then?

Everyone who is a tax payer helps pay for the criminal justice system. The potential difficulty of this case is that petty crime is usually punished with a fine, so these people may have to be given community service.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 16:31:58


Post by: NeedleOfInquiry


Let them starve to death...Really, I do mean that..

When I was in the military during the Carter Administration military pay was so low that an E6 with two kids qualified for public assistance.

We took care of our own... Money came out of my pocket along with others to keep the kids fed.

We did not go on the public dole and the kids got 3 meals a day.

When I married and two years later we had our first child we both worked our butts off and kept that kid and the next one fed even when there were times the wife and I lived off of leftovers from field rations I had paid for and not consumed in the field.

There is a national problem of girls having babies and the dad moves on and the family does not take in the girl or her kids because the government will.

It's time to stop that cold.

We as taxpayers can no longer afford it and it rewards terrible behavior patterns.

We as Americans teach a sizable part of our population that it's OK to be irresponsible, it's OK to never have a job as long as you are pumping out babies we will pay you for it and it's OK to impregnate a girl and then walk away because the government will take of your child for you..

Go look on Craigs list in any major cites and you will find food stamps on sale for cash....

Where do you think they come from? Do you think all of that food that was taken in those stores was eaten and not sold?

Look at the videos and see who is filling those carts and then discards then the second the system comes back on line...
What do you think is going to happen if the lights, and free food, is interrupted for a few weeks in those areas?

The overall problem needs to be solved and that will only happen when the free food and money stops and those who get them realize that just like the rest of America and the world if you do not work and your family will not support you then you starve...


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 17:06:18


Post by: agnosto




I realize you're being hyperbolic here because it's the internet and stuff. One thing that you and others may fail to realize is that the USDA initiated the food stamp program for two reasons, as a way to provide supplemental assistance to the working poor (you know, people without an organization behind them, backing them up) and the other reason was as a backdoor subsidy for the food industry, mostly farmers. More people buying food means more money flowing into the pockets of farmers...they just didn't foresee the advent of corporate farms and the death of the small-time farmer when the program first started. The program does a lot of good for a lot of people; focusing on the negatives here is like saying "kill everyone that carries a gun" because some wackjob walks into some place and kills a few people. Over generalizing something does not an argument make.

I would really like to see if you have the strength of your convictions when someone you know dies because of lack of care. Kudos to you and your family. I, myself, grew up hungry and had a full-time job all through high school so we could eat and helped pay the bills; now stop and ask yourself, why is that necessary? Why do companies make record profits and pay employees relatively so little here in the US? I know, it's the American dream; screw everybody else as long as I get mine. The thing is, the founding fathers of our country didn't live that way. Americans have a much stronger tradition of helping each other than leaving each other dangling in the breeze. There was a time when communities would come together and raise barns (heck some still do but nowadays we just chuckle at those backwards Mennonites) or watch after each other's kids. What happened to the concept of American community spirit and civic pride? Dead I guess after reading your rant about letting your neighbors die in the streets.

We've got two problems as I see it. Apathy (or outright hate in your case) an enablement. The government enables by just throwing public dollars into established programs for the poor without looking at underlying causes (even though there are countless studies) and actually fixing it. Why? Because, 1, it's easier to just shut them up by throwing the bare minimum at them for survival and 2 it keeps the bankroll rolling in from corporate sponsors who like their record profits; I mean, if WalMart had to pay someone a living wage without raising prices drastically, they'd have to cut their profits. D.C. tried to pass a living wage bill that would raise area workers minimum wages to 12.50/hour and Wal Mart threatened to close stores. Anybody who's been to D.C. knows how expensive it is there, 12.50 is nothing and they balked over that. Now, the apathy. Neighbors and family members don't need to care because "the government will just take care of it." these are usually the same people that wish the government would just stay out of their lives but are also the first ones in line with their hands out when they think it will get them some benefit. Here' in Oklahoma there's an alarming rise in the number of grandparents taking care of grandkids. To me that's family taking care of family but it also shows a lack in education on the parents fault. Parent apathy in educating their children in the consequences for their fething decisions; "It's the school's job to teach my kids." No, it's the school's job to educate your children, not to teach them morality and proper life-skills decision making, that's the job of a parent and something that most American parents fail at miserably; just sit in a crowded area and watch people interact, how often do you see a parent correct a child in a way that actually educates the child? Yeah.

Well, I kind of got into the realm of my pet peeves instead of addressing yours so I better quit typing now.
Cheers.



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 18:40:51


Post by: whembly


Geez guys... this thread just went sideways... o.O
 Ouze wrote:
You know, I've been thinking it over, and now I think maybe we should just let this one go.

Due to a software bug, some hungry people in the richest country in the world got some food to which they were not entitled from the richest company in said richest country. I reject the idea that we have to choose between "lets make them hungrier" or "lets screw up their lives forever by giving them criminal convictions". The software bug was addressed and the issue is fixed. I think we should show some prosecutorial discretion and just, you know, move on.


I tend to agree... or, at least dock them $10/month or so util their excess is paid off.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 20:30:02


Post by: cincydooley


 agnosto wrote:


I realize you're being hyperbolic here because it's the internet and stuff. One thing that you and others may fail to realize is that the USDA initiated the food stamp program for two reasons, as a way to provide supplemental assistance to the working poor (you know, people without an organization behind them, backing them up) and the other reason was as a backdoor subsidy for the food industry, mostly farmers. More people buying food means more money flowing into the pockets of farmers...they just didn't foresee the advent of corporate farms and the death of the small-time farmer when the program first started. The program does a lot of good for a lot of people; focusing on the negatives here is like saying "kill everyone that carries a gun" because some wackjob walks into some place and kills a few people. Over generalizing something does not an argument make.


Key here being SUPPLEMENTAL.


I would really like to see if you have the strength of your convictions when someone you know dies because of lack of care. Kudos to you and your family. I, myself, grew up hungry and had a full-time job all through high school so we could eat and helped pay the bills; now stop and ask yourself, why is that necessary? Why do companies make record profits and pay employees relatively so little here in the US? I know, it's the American dream; screw everybody else as long as I get mine. The thing is, the founding fathers of our country didn't live that way. Americans have a much stronger tradition of helping each other than leaving each other dangling in the breeze. There was a time when communities would come together and raise barns (heck some still do but nowadays we just chuckle at those backwards Mennonites) or watch after each other's kids. What happened to the concept of American community spirit and civic pride? Dead I guess after reading your rant about letting your neighbors die in the streets.


I'd wager, based on his post that I suspect you didn't actually read completely, that he wouldn't let that happen. Nor would I. Hence the whole "help out family" thing you DO mention in your post.


We've got two problems as I see it. Apathy (or outright hate in your case) an enablement. The government enables by just throwing public dollars into established programs for the poor without looking at underlying causes (even though there are countless studies) and actually fixing it. Why? Because, 1, it's easier to just shut them up by throwing the bare minimum at them for survival and 2 it keeps the bankroll rolling in from corporate sponsors who like their record profits; I mean, if WalMart had to pay someone a living wage without raising prices drastically, they'd have to cut their profits. D.C. tried to pass a living wage bill that would raise area workers minimum wages to 12.50/hour and Wal Mart threatened to close stores. Anybody who's been to D.C. knows how expensive it is there, 12.50 is nothing and they balked over that. Now, the apathy. Neighbors and family members don't need to care because "the government will just take care of it." these are usually the same people that wish the government would just stay out of their lives but are also the first ones in line with their hands out when they think it will get them some benefit. Here' in Oklahoma there's an alarming rise in the number of grandparents taking care of grandkids. To me that's family taking care of family but it also shows a lack in education on the parents fault. Parent apathy in educating their children in the consequences for their fething decisions; "It's the school's job to teach my kids." No, it's the school's job to educate your children, not to teach them morality and proper life-skills decision making, that's the job of a parent and something that most American parents fail at miserably; just sit in a crowded area and watch people interact, how often do you see a parent correct a child in a way that actually educates the child? Yeah.

Well, I kind of got into the realm of my pet peeves instead of addressing yours so I better quit typing now.
Cheers.



So so you grandparents RASING kids or grandparents providing child care for kids? Because those are two wildly different things, neither of which inherently implies lack of education on the parents part. Additionally, I think saying "most fail at miserably" is absurdly hyperbolic.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 21:32:24


Post by: NeedleOfInquiry


I realize you're being hyperbolic here because it's the internet and stuff.


No, I'm not...

Most countries you do not work, you do not eat... You make choices to only have as many kids as you can feed. You do not buy bling or new cars or crack or dope. You work hard and pass those values to your kids.

The government supplementing those jobs with food stamps and welfare is why Americans put up with those low paying jobs...

Eliminate the supplements and watch what happens...People who can not feed their kids get pissed and take action to either get a job that pays enough or get together with others to effect real change, which neither party wants...

Welfare in America is designed to keep people down. Look what happened before welfare when enough people got hungry...They got pissed enough to effect better paying jobs at the nation level and more of the wealth went to more of the country.

That will not happen now as long as there is welfare and food stamps and that is by design. Having the government take wealth from the rich to give as it pleases to the poor ends one way. Look at Venezuela where they just nationalized their Best Buys...

I have seen it in country after country, and I have seen it, not read about it.

A person does not respect what is given to them as charity...it demeans them and breaks down the family.

Welfare steals respect.

The country cannot survive the way it is going with over half the country not working and the rest feeding those who will not work via taxes which the government gives out as it pleases.

What you saw when the system went down and that chain of stores opened their doors is the beginning, just like those flash mobs that are getting bigger and bigger.

I do not hate the poor, my family grew up very poor for over 100 years and it was individual family members who chose the military as a way out over several generations who changed that part of the family.

I have cousins and nephews and nieces still collecting welfare and food stamps and as long as it's free they will keep taking it and never accomplish anything in their lives...

I know what I am talking about and the best thing that could ever happen to them is for the supply to be cut off...



After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 21:37:49


Post by: hotsauceman1


your experiance does NOT equal reality. One thing my social research class taught me.
Just because all you see is people collecting welfare and not doing things is wrong.
First, a majority of welfare recipiants are only on welfare for 4-5 years.
Second, many do work and are not lazy.
You are correct that it does steal respect, because people look at them with contempt


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 21:53:06


Post by: easysauce


so,

step one, the systems does its best to support you, by giving you "free money" for food in the form of and EBT


step two, people use every penny of free money available, because its FREE MONEY.....

step three, make sure your FREE MONEY PROGRAM works, cause if it bugs, guess what will happen?


did these people do the "right" thing? its one of those stealing bread to feed your family questions I guess, although, I did see carts filled with lots of junk food crap.

I wouldnt say they did the "right" thing,
people who did go over and take advantage of it, yes absolutely, take away benefits until the $ amount evens out with with they have already fraudulently taken (so if they stole 400 bucks, and get 40$ a month, take it away for 10 months), making it no net loss for them, since they already got that amount of food off the program.

but its not a "lets ruin their lives over this" kind of thing... temp benefits garnishing or removal would make it no harm no foul.

but the real mistake is that the system was so vunerable that i COULD have no limit to the free money in the first place... that should be pretty much your #1 priority when giving away free money, put a limit on it, that cannot be gotten around.




After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 22:00:08


Post by: MeanGreenStompa


 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I realize you're being hyperbolic here because it's the internet and stuff.


No, I'm not...

Most countries you do not work, you do not eat... You make choices to only have as many kids as you can feed. You do not buy bling or new cars or crack or dope. You work hard and pass those values to your kids.



No, in many of those countries, with not support network at all, you don't have as many kids as you can feed, you have more and hope some will survive the famine/civil war/diseases/criminal warlords/minefields.

The allusion you place, that America should be more like those nations with no welfare support network, is fine and dandy if you want America to fall into the sort of state those nations are in.

It's call the 3rd world.


Welfare in America is designed to keep people down. Look what happened before welfare when enough people got hungry...They got pissed enough to effect better paying jobs at the nation level and more of the wealth went to more of the country.

You're entirely wrong, the welfare state was established in the previous century to support the hungry and the downtrodden and before it existed, you starved to death, worked in crime, emigrated or lived subsidence/serfdom/workhouse existences.

Or are you one of those quaint people that watches John Wayne films and thinks that's how the Old West was?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 22:07:23


Post by: Kilkrazy


The welfare state was established in the 16th century in the UK.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 22:10:23


Post by: MeanGreenStompa


 Kilkrazy wrote:
The welfare state was established in the 16th century in the UK.


I believe the modern incarnation of a welfare state started with Asquith in the UK.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 22:37:02


Post by: Kilkrazy


That is true, however a system of parish based relief for the poor, essentially a form of welfare state, was begun in Elizabethan times.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/10 23:06:24


Post by: agnosto


First let me say that I respect your opinion and I can feel the frustration in your posts; I share some of them.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
Most countries you do not work, you do not eat... You make choices to only have as many kids as you can feed. You do not buy bling or new cars or crack or dope. You work hard and pass those values to your kids.

You might think that, and it might sound good in your head but it's actually wrong. I've lived in two other (S. Korea and Japan) countries and they both had social "parachutes" of one form or another. I've traveled extensively in many other countries and noticed the same. Even countries that are too poor themselves to provide such benefits to their citizens accept these services from outside organizations (UNICEF?). What you are again doing is making general statements regarding all people who receive government assistance based upon the few that abuse the system. I grew up on welfare because my family was, well, dirt poor. We worked hard, I mowed yards from 13 years old plus and put in and then when I was old enough to gain full-time regular employment, I did so. According to you, I should have been pissing it all away on drugs and blinging out my non-existent car instead of helping my injured father put food on the table and pay bills. I'm not trying to garner respect or awe you, or anyone, by sharing my story here but to show you that people do work hard and do share values with their kids; we're the ones that make it out and are able to break the chains of poverty. Reading further on, it sounds like some folks in your family got the idea too. Read some studies on generational poverty and collective intelligence though; if the "hood" is all you know, you live what you know. It's not always easy for people to break out but people do and that's what makes all the help worth it.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
The government supplementing those jobs with food stamps and welfare is why Americans put up with those low paying jobs...Eliminate the supplements and watch what happens...People who can not feed their kids get pissed and take action to either get a job that pays enough or get together with others to effect real change, which neither party wants...

People are fed up with them now or haven't you been watching the news? Protest after protest in front of walmarts and other businesses asking for more wages. Local and state governments protecting businesses from workers who want to unionize so that they are able to act collectively. Sound familiar? It should. It's pretty similar to the labor movement sans the violence.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
Welfare in America is designed to keep people down. Look what happened before welfare when enough people got hungry...They got pissed enough to effect better paying jobs at the nation level and more of the wealth went to more of the country.

We're going to differ here. It may have evolved to be this way but it was originally created to help people who were barely making it to make ends meet for their families during times of hardship. All of these programs were meant to be short term; people would hit a hiccup in life, need a hand up, get a little help for a few weeks or months and then move on. It still does work this way. I know it does because I worked the job. Yes, I was a Social Worker, I had a case load with an end average of 620ish families. Sure there were generational welfare recipients; I had 4 generations from the same family in my interview room at the same time one day, but there were also people that came in because dad (or mom) lost their job and they needed some help. I gotta tell you that I loved getting those phone calls from people after a few weeks, a month or even a few months asking me close their case; damn near the best feeling in the world. Again, it's easy to get tied up in the negative stereotypes, I'm guilty of the same; I guess I'm lucky in that I've had those positive experiences where I saw the system work the way it's supposed to.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
That will not happen now as long as there is welfare and food stamps and that is by design. Having the government take wealth from the rich to give as it pleases to the poor ends one way. Look at Venezuela where they just nationalized their Best Buys...

Yeah, it's called taxes and it's been going on for as long as there's been people. The Roman Senate passed out Bread to the Plebes and forgave debt (Saudi Arabia still does). Venezuela's an extreme example. I'm all for doing away with things like the EITC (earned income tax credit); why in Christ's name should you ever get more in taxes back than you ever put in? Feeding people is one thing, giving medical treatment to needy kids is great too; giving people money they didn't earn? nope. The breeders already get money from me and my wife through real estate taxes that I'll never benefit from because we don't have kids and won't be sending anyone to an area school.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I have seen it in country after country, and I have seen it, not read about it.

Redistribution of wealth occurs in one form or another in all 1st world countries; I'm not sure what your point here is. Scandinavian countries are absolute havens for this concept.


 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
A person does not respect what is given to them as charity...it demeans them and breaks down the family.Welfare steals respect.

Won't argue here. I agree; make them earn it somehow. When I worked at DHS, I said there's more than one way to institutionalize someone; they don't just have to go to prison for it to happen. That said, there appears to also be a right way to do it (see the Scandinavian country thing).

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
The country cannot survive the way it is going with over half the country not working and the rest feeding those who will not work via taxes which the government gives out as it pleases.

Eh, what? You lost me there, man. 1/2 the country's not on foodstamps. We're a country of over 300 million of which 47 million are on food stamps; current estimates are that the number has peaked and will decline over the next decade. Here's an interesting article from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/23/why-are-47-million-americans-on-food-stamps-its-the-recession-mostly/


 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I do not hate the poor, my family grew up very poor for over 100 years and it was individual family members who chose the military as a way out over several generations who changed that part of the family.

Not everyone has that option. I was an honor recruit and a squad leader in the young marines in HS and well on my way to enlisting when I graduated, then a car accident and ear surgery took that option from me. I agree that people should be responsible for themselves but how do we, as a society, help them without telling them what to do? Because telling people what to do in the US is apparently a no-no.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I have cousins and nephews and nieces still collecting welfare and food stamps and as long as it's free they will keep taking it and never accomplish anything in their lives...

I do too. I even have a niece who abuses the system and will ever be a worthless waste of flesh that will never be more than a drag on the rest of humanity. Does that mean we should tank the whole system because she is still taking in oxygen? Nope. I have some hope for her kids.

 NeedleOfInquiry wrote:
I know what I am talking about and the best thing that could ever happen to them is for the supply to be cut off...

I can agree with you in part. It should be similar to TANF in that there's a time limit for benefits. The programs should have a maximum number of months of usage (except for Medicaid for kids). I'd also recommend amendments to the WIA (Workforce Investment Act); this is a worthless piece of legislation that is just a sinkhole of taxpayer money. Make the WIA useful by providing job-skill determination and training for welfare recipients. Teach them a skill so they don't need welfare anymore.


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/12 11:52:37


Post by: Frazzled


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The problem with stripping them of it, while appropriate, hurts slot of children and innocents who will pay for someone eldest crime.


Haven't you heard? According to the SOB codex, there are no innocents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 djones520 wrote:
Something certainly needs to be done about it. Is this the best way? Don't know.

I'd probably go for criminal prosecution myself.


Thunderdome?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/12 21:26:20


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The problem with stripping them of it, while appropriate, hurts slot of children and innocents who will pay for someone eldest crime.

And what about having them tried, and having the guilty perform community service instead of losing their SNAP eligibility?


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/12 21:44:12


Post by: LordofHats


Maybe we should just boil them in transfats? We'll have to do something with them once we stop eating them


After last month’s shopping frenzy, Louisiana governor looks to strip food stamps from abusers @ 2013/11/13 08:22:43


Post by: cadbren


I see a couple of problems with targeting those who took advantage of the system.

Firstly, permission was given to staff to process the customers without there being card limits. The customers were given permission to do what they did whether it was in the spirit of the card or not.

Secondly in regards community service. The kind of person who takes advantage of something like this, probably is long term unemployed or never worked, what exactly would you get them to do? It's actually more hassle supervising such people than it's worth.